A rare budget maneuver known as a “pocket rescission,” which allows the cancellation of congressionally approved spending, has been used by Donald Trump’s administration to cancel $810 million. The move targets health, housing, education and international programs.
On Friday, the White House said it was canceling the funding. The administration’s position is that pocket rescission rests within presidential authority, whereas Congress and the GAO say the president goes beyond his authority when he uses this method.
What the $810 Million Covers
The cuts break down by program:
- $567 million from Health and Human Services programs funding non-government organizations supporting refugees, asylees and other noncitizens
- $25 million from education programs for migrant students
- $70 million from programs labeled “Woke International Education”
The Justice Department runs an office focused on easing racial friction, while other initiatives include a minority entrepreneur business development program, Housing and Urban Development counseling services, and Health and Human Services grants labeled as “outright harmful and blatantly ideological.” A number of the groups getting these funds are run by people who previously served in President Barack Obama’s administration.
Collins’s Warning
Collins criticized the reductions, arguing they were “the most recent attempt by this Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to undermine Congress’s Constitutional power of the purse.” She pointed to the GAO’s determination that pocket rescissions are unlawful and not allowed under the Impoundment Control Act.
The Timing of the Proposal
The latest pocket rescission saw the White House propose canceling the funding toward the close of the federal fiscal year on Sept. 30.
Collins claimed the schedule was designed so the funds would run out before the 45-day review window set by Congress had ended. The House is not expected to meet again until after the November election.
The Legal Case Against Pocket Rescission
The GAO has compared pocket rescissions to a line-item veto, which the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the OMB under Trump has said the Impoundment Control Act does not explicitly bar rescinding funds near fiscal year-end.
More than a year back, Trump issued the first pocket rescission in close to 50 years, with an attempt to cancel $4.9 billion in congressionally approved foreign aid. The Supreme Court refused to stop it. The previous pocket rescission came during the presidency of Jimmy Carter, and was proposed long before the 45-day review deadline.
What Happens Next
The administration’s proposal puts Congress on a tight deadline, with just 45 days to act before the rescission takes effect. The House is not sitting during that period, having recessed until after the November election.
The administration still holds that pocket rescission falls within presidential authority. The GAO and Congress take a contrary view.
“the most recent attempt by this Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to undermine Congress’s Constitutional power of the purse”
Where the paper stands
The paper backs the White House’s use of pocket rescission to cancel $810 million in funding, and is against any agency or office that writes its own authority to take money from the American people without the consent of Congress. The administration’s argument—that pocket rescission rests within presidential authority—stands on firmer ground than the OMB’s claim that the Impoundment Control Act does not explicitly bar year-end rescissions. The GAO’s comparison to the line-item veto, which the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional, supports the administration’s position that such rescissions exceed executive authority.
The paper is also against the concentration of power in the OMB, which has become an independent engine of decision-making that writes its own authority and imposes costs on the American people without congressional consent. The pattern of year-end rescissions appears designed to force Congress into a position where it cannot meaningfully review or reject them, since the House will not sit again until after the November election.
What the reader should watch for is whether the administration continues to treat pocket rescission as a settled matter, rather than a disputed legal question. The paper will continue to oppose any effort by any office to gather authority unto itself and spend the American people’s money without the consent of Congress.
Source material: “Trump revives rare budget maneuver to rescind $810M in congressionally approved funds,” Fox News.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.